If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The more effort you put into posting up your questions, the more effort users will put into replying. There is no such thing as a dumb question, but please don't be lazy...

This is what doesnt make sense to me.... In putting an extra drain in the exhaust side, you're allowing the oil to drain back to sump instead of 'pooling' enough to feed the intake side of the head, therefore creating a possibility of starving the intake side of oil. Doesnt make sense to me....

I'd say, that as bealy suggested, many of these failures are due to other issues, lack of overall oil capacity and poor supply being the most likely suspects.

Speaking from my own first hand experience, I can again say i havent had an issue with oil. I have a modified sump, extended pickup, external filter and cooler setup, that holds a bit over 7L of oil. My engine is mounted past straight up and down, it leans to the exhaust side slightly! (refer pic) Again, i've never had any oil pooling in the head, never even caught any in the catch can at all! A properly set up rwd 3s can be as reliable as it ever was in any factory application, its been proved time and time again.

This is what doesnt make sense to me.... In putting an extra drain in the exhaust side, you're allowing the oil to drain back to sump instead of 'pooling' enough to feed the intake side of the head, therefore creating a possibility of starving the intake side of oil. Doesnt make sense to me....

The pooling is a by product of the pressure fed lubrication, not the method by which valve train lubrication occurs. There is a bit of splash lubrication here and there, but an oil pool is not required/desired.

If having a drain on the exhaust side was going to be an issue, why would toyota design one into the beams head?

As long as there is sufficient oil in the sump there is no reason why holding oil in the head would cause bearings to spin. I imagine this is why those who run a decent sized sump have no issues.

well start throwing 1.4 Gs into the corner and watch your motors surge
what i have done does works and that was with a 2s sump as well
i have even set up a 3sge with a 2s sump on slicks that does philip island in 1.42 westfield clubman

well start throwing 1.4 Gs into the corner and watch your motors surge
what i have done does works and that was with a 2s sump as well
i have even set up a 3sge with a 2s sump on slicks that does philip island in 1.42 westfield clubman

Largely irrelevent for our applications.
But, point taken on the abilities of wet sump designs.

on that my initial thought was that being a lighter car it could pull higher g's than a super taxi as there is less weight acting on the loaded tyre. so for a given G there is less force applied to the face of the tyre on the bituman. However, this could be countered by the heavier weight acting as a pressdown grip enhancer, and the light weight may work against the tyre?

I have been lucky enough to do some track days in the pretend v8 supa taxis with slicks... used porsche cup tyres. The loaded corner traction is unreal. was a real eye opener

I don't mean the V8's.
Super tourers are a different class. Maximum 2 litre NA only, min weight 975kg. Pretty good comparison for an ae86 I thought.

I've no doubt an ae86 could be setup to pull some serious forces, but to say that most would make 1.4g with just set of good tyres on? I doubt it. And even then, a litre of oil stuck in the head for a few seconds can be overcome by decent sump design or dry sump.

Glenn's car is pretty serious, there are not many comparable cars on DC. Most are far milder in terms of cornering performance.